MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Epigenetics and the Environmental Regulation of the Genome and Its Function

2009· review· en· W2172126177 on OpenAlexafffund
Tieyuan Zhang, Michael J. Meaney

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Psychology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEpigenomeEpigeneticsBiologyMechanism (biology)GenomeFunction (biology)NeuroscienceEpigenesisGeneticsEvolutionary biologyComputational biologyPsychologyGeneDNA methylationGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are numerous examples in psychology and other disciplines of the enduring effects of early experience on neural function. In this article, we review the emerging evidence for epigenetics as a candidate mechanism for these effects. Epigenetics refers to functionally relevant modifications to the genome that do not involve a change in nucleotide sequence. Such modifications include chemical marks that regulate the transcription of the genome. There is now evidence that environmental events can directly modify the epigenetic state of the genome. Thus studies with rodent models suggest that during both early development and in adult life, environmental signals can activate intracellular pathways that directly remodel the "epigenome," leading to changes in gene expression and neural function. These studies define a biological basis for the interplay between environmental signals and the genome in the regulation of individual differences in behavior, cognition, and physiology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations572
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of PsychologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207